Most important qaulities that need improvements in markers- consistancy and triggers

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Most important qaulities that need improvements in markers- consistancy and triggers

Dont get me wrong, there are lots of things that a marker needs to have/ be in order to be considered good. The only thing is that other markers have achieved them. We want markers to be small and light, so there are markers like the SFL autococker, FLY Angel, and X-MAG. We want markers to be able to shoot fast without chopping so we get ACEs and, in the case of mags, level 10. There is also a lot of work that has gone into markers that allow them to shoot at certain bps speeds with minimal or nonexistant dropoff. Mag valves can shoot up to 26 bps without dropoff if what i have read online is correct. But there are still areas that all markers need to improve in. I thought this forum would be the perfect place to get opinions on whether other people agree with me and how they think that the improvements can be made-
Two areas that I think that markers need to improve on are (1) consistency and (2) their triggers.

1: I consider accuracy and consistency in paintball as 2 different things- accuracy is determined by having a good barrel, good paint, and a good paint/barrel match. Consistancy is mostly having the same pressure and volume of propellant push the paintball each time the marker is fired in order to achieve a consistant velocity in order to achieve tighter groupings of shots. From some reading i found that +/- 5 fps is a good consistency, and +/- 2 to 3 fps is a great, tournament quality consistency. But I have to ask: Over, say 100 ft, what difference would 10 fps make in inches?(the complete difference of +/- 5fps) How about even 5 or 6 fps? Probably more than enough for the player to miss a target that he may have been aiming perfectly towards.

How much more "accurate" would markers be if they fired with a consistency of +/- .5 to 1 fps? Is this even possible with the paint we use today, or is the paint itself too inconsitent in size, shape, and mass? What could be done to the next generation automag in order to achieve this level of consistency? How would internal regulators and LPRs (Low Pressure Regulators) apply to possibly seeing this in a mag? Would building a reg into the next gen bolt help in any way? What CAN BE DONE?! For mags, I think that the first step is stopping the trend of having the monstrous ginormous battery in front of the trigger where the there should be an adapter for a vertical regualtor. I can see why the decision was made to put it there when the E-MAG was being designed, its pretty much you can fit a huge battery capable of using over about 20,000 shots, but I think that in future renditions you should have a space for a rechargeable 9 or 9.6 volt battery in the trigger frame along with the rest of the electronics. Smart parts has accomplished this with its 2k3 shocker, and if samrt parts can do it then in my opinion AGD can too. Yes, the battery wont get as many shots, but they are pretty cheap and it wouldn't be expensive to buy two and a double charger. Hell, chances are you use the same batteries in your hopper anyway, so why not buy 4 and a quad charger. Anyway, being able to have a secondary reg will help to increase the consistancy of the air moving in to the marker, but I think that internals can be designed that will be able to really make a consistant marker.

2: Today there are many markers that say that they will shoot 20 bps. One coming out soon says that it will do 30. There are even elctro boards for markers that allow the markers to do 66.6 bps, whether the internals will be able to keep up or not is another story. My point is, can anyon really pull the trigger 30 times in one second? Is there anyone that can outshoot a HALO B on a current trigger found on any marker? What will have to be done to triggers in order to allow people to achieve this level of paint volume? I think that a very advanced trigger has to be made in order to keep up with these very high rates of fire. I think that the new magnetic triggers are a step in the right direction- they dont need springs, which will eventually wear down, and they use a beam of light to detetct when the trigger has reached the fire point. But I think more has to be done. The hybrid mode on E-MAGS is good, it provides a mode for people used to firing mags or non-electric markers a mode in which they can get a good ROF, but people who were used to super small electro trigger pulls liked the electro mode better because the hybrid mode meant that a longer pull was needed.

I think that next generation needs to combine a super short 1 to 1.5mm trigger pull with the blast of the reactive valve. Here's how I envision it: first you need an amazingly light trigger (i mean the actual part that you pull, the stem-like object that you move with your finger(s)-just so there is no confuson). I'm talking space-age light, would practically float in the air light. Why? First, because this means that you have move less mass with each trigger pull, which in itself puts less strain on your hand and would probably let you get a slightly better ROF, but the main reason is so that you would only need a really weak magnet in order to hold the trigger in a forward position. I'm talking so light that you feel as if there is no resistance at all in your trigger pull. Then, right as you start to cross the beam that actuates the firing, the reactive valve rockets the trigger back. All of this would have to be heavily adjustable to suit each owners favorite settings. Basically, I think that a design like this would improve a lot on current designs because right now if you want a super light pull you'll get a super light return, a heavier return will get you a heavier pull. What i described could pobably be achieved more easily. This would allow the user to easily program the amount of weight in the pull and return. However, i doubt that you would be able to generate enough return force with electromagnets without a ginormous battery that I am trying to avoid. Is any of this possible? Is it better than the current setup that markers have? Tom, what visions have you had for future MAG triggers?

Also, i have one last idea that I think is perticularily good. Opposite of the magnet that keeps the trigger from moving unless it is touched, there should another "return-assist" magnet that acts upon the trigger on the opposite direction. When the trigger is at rest it in in an equalibrium between the two magnets, at the starting position. However, the trigger can be moved in either direction, back or forward. The idea behind this is that as the reactive valve heavily and quickly but smoothly blasts the trigger back after a fired shot, the "return assist magnet fluidly but quickly slows then reverses the direction of the movement of the trigger. For example, if from the starting position the trigger was pulled back to the firing point but the firers finger quickly left the trigger, the tigger would bounce back slightly passed the starting point and then back to the starting point, again in equalibrium between the two magnets. The idea of this is, even though the firee will pull a slightly greater distance, he will already have a momentum moving the trigger back towards the firing point to much more rapidly fire his marker. I would think that this is much better than having the trigger just hit a pieve of metal and stick there, requiring the firee to start the pull with no momentum. How would the tournaments feel about this? In my opinion it would be fine since the trigger could never without the assistance of the firee get past the starting point. However, I dont know any of the rules and regs so I really wouldnt be able to say.

Tom, I would really appreciate a response from you. I really admire your dedication to the sport, the company, and the fans. I feel like I have some valid suggestions and deserve a valid response. Oh, and I live in Illinois too, in a 'burb about 20 miles north of chicago. Where are the AGD offices? Dont worry, i wont come and bother you at work.

I also have to say one more thing, and be aware I AM NOT SAYING ANY OF THIS TO "BURN" AGD, IM SAYING THIS SO THAT IF SOMEONE AT AGD IS READING THEY KNOW WHY AT LEAST ONE PERSON ISNT BUYING THEIR PRODUCT. I HOPE THEY TAKE IT THE RIGHT WAY, AS ADVICE FROM AN ADMIRING FAN: As a prospective buyer of a high level gun, i have to say that I cannot consider an AGD product. I wont buy an E-MAG for four reasons: A)its heavy. B) The battery thing. C) its ugly, just a plain unattractive marker, and D) with the semi-availability of the X-MAG, I cant buy the E-MAG because i would be putting myself out of top tier of technology in months, and for $900+ its not worth it. Even if the X-MAG was available for, say, $1000 in America (i wont buy from Europe because of the tech support issues of having to send a package to Europe whenever something happensd that i dont know how to fix) , i wouldnt buy it because even though it fixed the heaviness issue and it fixed the ugliness issue (the X-MAG is actaully the most attractive marker in my opinion, simple and elegant, small and compact), there is still the battery issue and the fact that other markers have better trigger pulls. I really like the level 10 and the 26 bps without shootdown, but other good companies seem to achieve high rates without breaks using ACEs and they also seem to be able to shoot fast without shootdown. Get producing a mag that exceeds every other gun out there in every aspect of what players want from there guns and youll see who still plays with cockers, angels, and timmys.

I see your new to the forum and welcome. Yes I do read these posts and many times I do reply.

You have laid out a broad spectrum of "wants". You didn't say what you would be willing to give up to get those wants. Presumably you wouldn't want to give up anything you would just look for a clear straight up improvement in a marker.

Lets look at an example, say lower weight and lower pressure, both desirable features to todays player. In order to get lower pressure you need to make the air chamber and air passages BIGGER. This has the effect of making the whole gun bigger and heavier. So in reality you can't get both at the same time but must determine which is more important.

In terms of triggers there are already triggers out there like the roller trigger that can shoot 20 bps all day. Problem is they look ugly so people don't use them.

On the subject of accuracy take the time to read the entire thread here on "Paintball Spin Physics" and you will have all your answers on velocity and consistency.

Tell me your willing to buy a new sear and bolt every few months and I can give you a smaller battery, most people would be calling me upset.

Weight wise the new Emax with the aluminum valve and body weighs the same as an Angel so I can't believe its that big an issue at this point.

Re: Most important qaulities that need improvements in markers- consistancy and triggers

Originally posted by tuna

Let me briefly address a few of the points here. Because a lot of the concerns you have are already addressed and then some of them are based on pure myth.I will over simplify some of it as its rather complex and would take some time to relate. I will also bold it so you can see my responses better.

Dont get me wrong, there are lots of things that a marker needs to have/ be in order to be considered good. The only thing is that other markers have achieved them. We want markers to be small and light, so there are markers like the SFL autococker, FLY Angel, and X-MAG. We want markers to be able to shoot fast without chopping so we get ACEs and, in the case of mags, level 10. There is also a lot of work that has gone into markers that allow them to shoot at certain bps speeds with minimal or nonexistant dropoff. Mag valves can shoot up to 26 bps without dropoff if what i have read online is correct. But there are still areas that all markers need to improve in. I thought this forum would be the perfect place to get opinions on whether other people agree with me and how they think that the improvements can be made-
Two areas that I think that markers need to improve on are (1) consistency and (2) their triggers.

1: I consider accuracy and consistency in paintball as 2 different things- accuracy is determined by having a good barrel, good paint, and a good paint/barrel match. Consistancy is mostly having the same pressure and volume of propellant push the paintball each time the marker is fired in order to achieve a consistant velocity in order to achieve tighter groupings of shots. From some reading i found that +/- 5 fps is a good consistency, and +/- 2 to 3 fps is a great, tournament quality consistency. But I have to ask: Over, say 100 ft, what difference would 10 fps make in inches?(the complete difference of +/- 5fps) How about even 5 or 6 fps? Probably more than enough for the player to miss a target that he may have been aiming perfectly towards.

Wrong... they are parts of the same thing. In fact accuracy IS more determined by consistency. And without going into great detail I can tell you that the consistency of the Mag valve is superior to all of them. It is the only marker that is designed from the ground up, with small imperfections corrected along the way, that takes full advantage of all the subtle nuances of the properties subjected to the Orings and minimizing distances of air passages to get the best balance of sealing and reduced friction with fast and furious recharge rates all at the same time. Every little detail of its design hinges around these principles of applied pressure, oring distortion and minmal resistance and distance of the air flow. It is the fastest recharging system out there and it actualy is ahead of you waiting to fire before you can actualy do so. You would have to see this to believe it. But I have seen it. Most markers out there make great efforts to overcome this flaw in thier design and fail to do so because they are not designed from the ground up with this basic knowledge applied first to the marker. They all are attempting to fix a basicaly flawed concept. And so after many years they still have not caught up. And they will not as long as they do not understand these concepts.

Secondly the ball in itself is a very poor areodynamic thing. It cannot be but so accurate. Eliminating all the other variables this thing is subjected to incredible G forces accelerating out of the barrel and then, being poorly areodynamic it is then subjected to the normal forces of nature. Gravity, wind, distortion etc. Accuracy in a paintball is as good as it gets with what you can control. Even a bullet spining perfectly and traveling at much higher speeds inherently drops or is affected by wind.

How much more "accurate" would markers be if they fired with a consistency of +/- .5 to 1 fps? Is this even possible with the paint we use today, or is the paint itself too inconsitent in size, shape, and mass? What could be done to the next generation automag in order to achieve this level of consistency? How would internal regulators and LPRs (Low Pressure Regulators) apply to possibly seeing this in a mag? Would building a reg into the next gen bolt help in any way? What CAN BE DONE?! For mags, I think that the first step is stopping the trend of having the monstrous ginormous battery in front of the trigger where the there should be an adapter for a vertical regualtor. I can see why the decision was made to put it there when the E-MAG was being designed, its pretty much you can fit a huge battery capable of using over about 20,000 shots, but I think that in future renditions you should have a space for a rechargeable 9 or 9.6 volt battery in the trigger frame along with the rest of the electronics. Smart parts has accomplished this with its 2k3 shocker, and if samrt parts can do it then in my opinion AGD can too. Yes, the battery wont get as many shots, but they are pretty cheap and it wouldn't be expensive to buy two and a double charger. Hell, chances are you use the same batteries in your hopper anyway, so why not buy 4 and a quad charger. Anyway, being able to have a secondary reg will help to increase the consistancy of the air moving in to the marker, but I think that internals can be designed that will be able to really make a consistant marker.

LPR has NO AFFECT on the pressure subjected on the ball! It has none!!! In order for a ball to accelerate fast enough to exit the barrel at 300 FPS you must subject the ball to the same (fairly much) blast of air to get it moving. Your confusing the pressures of air that it takes to move the parts around with what has to dump from the chamber to move the ball. It is not the same thing at all. A LP marker may or may not have the same pressure in the dump chamber as a HP marker. If it does not have the same pressure it must dump a proportionaly larger mass of air to accomplish that goal of accelerating the ball. That is just a simple fact.

2: Today there are many markers that say that they will shoot 20 bps. One coming out soon says that it will do 30. There are even elctro boards for markers that allow the markers to do 66.6 bps, whether the internals will be able to keep up or not is another story. My point is, can anyon really pull the trigger 30 times in one second? Is there anyone that can outshoot a HALO B on a current trigger found on any marker? What will have to be done to triggers in order to allow people to achieve this level of paint volume? I think that a very advanced trigger has to be made in order to keep up with these very high rates of fire. I think that the new magnetic triggers are a step in the right direction- they dont need springs, which will eventually wear down, and they use a beam of light to detetct when the trigger has reached the fire point. But I think more has to be done. The hybrid mode on E-MAGS is good, it provides a mode for people used to firing mags or non-electric markers a mode in which they can get a good ROF, but people who were used to super small electro trigger pulls liked the electro mode better because the hybrid mode meant that a longer pull was needed.

While you are correct in that people cannot pull the amount of availablity they already have nor can a loader keep up after a point..you will find that by inherent design those markers cannot deliver what they claim. Their design does not allow full recharge of their Air chambers at the rate they claim. It's one thing to fire them at 30 BPS with no paint but totaly another to fully recharge the chamber at 30 BPS at the same level needed to achieve consistency at HROF. And they all fail at this except the RT valve. Inherent in the RT valves design is that it dumps double the operating pressure to the chamber BEFORE you can make the next shot. All of the other designs NEVER return to thier first shot pressure even in a normal shot string. The RT valve is the only one that can do it. Simple fact. I seen it with my own eyes. Smooth as butter don't get you BPS at a consistent air chamber dump at a high rate of fire.

Electronic triggers remove the mechanical link and so help this I agree. But at some point the lightness of them is too light! Heck we already are at the sub ounce stage now. And you start losing control of the trigger at some point. It can be taken too far.

The purpose of that battery being that size has everything to do with providing you with a large enough Selenoid to assure reliability. To assure you will always shoot without overheating a too small of a Selenoid like other guns try to use. They often incorporate smaller selenoids of multiple numbers that cannot be easily kept cool and cannot operate at high rates of fire without suffering. They are always on the edge of non performance. They are designed at the lower end of operational tolerances for lightness and compactness and not for ultimate reliability. Which do you want?

I think that next generation needs to combine a super short 1 to 1.5mm trigger pull with the blast of the reactive valve. Here's how I envision it: first you need an amazingly light trigger (i mean the actual part that you pull, the stem-like object that you move with your finger(s)-just so there is no confuson). I'm talking space-age light, would practically float in the air light. Why? First, because this means that you have move less mass with each trigger pull, which in itself puts less strain on your hand and would probably let you get a slightly better ROF, but the main reason is so that you would only need a really weak magnet in order to hold the trigger in a forward position. I'm talking so light that you feel as if there is no resistance at all in your trigger pull. Then, right as you start to cross the beam that actuates the firing, the reactive valve rockets the trigger back. All of this would have to be heavily adjustable to suit each owners favorite settings. Basically, I think that a design like this would improve a lot on current designs because right now if you want a super light pull you'll get a super light return, a heavier return will get you a heavier pull. What i described could pobably be achieved more easily. This would allow the user to easily program the amount of weight in the pull and return. However, i doubt that you would be able to generate enough return force with electromagnets without a ginormous battery that I am trying to avoid. Is any of this possible? Is it better than the current setup that markers have? Tom, what visions have you had for future MAG triggers?

I can again point out that too light is too light. However I cannot comment on what Tom is doing with the trigger on non electro's. He is messing with some stuff though.

Also, i have one last idea that I think is perticularily good. Opposite of the magnet that keeps the trigger from moving unless it is touched, there should another "return-assist" magnet that acts upon the trigger on the opposite direction. When the trigger is at rest it in in an equalibrium between the two magnets, at the starting position. However, the trigger can be moved in either direction, back or forward. The idea behind this is that as the reactive valve heavily and quickly but smoothly blasts the trigger back after a fired shot, the "return assist magnet fluidly but quickly slows then reverses the direction of the movement of the trigger. For example, if from the starting position the trigger was pulled back to the firing point but the firers finger quickly left the trigger, the tigger would bounce back slightly passed the starting point and then back to the starting point, again in equalibrium between the two magnets. The idea of this is, even though the firee will pull a slightly greater distance, he will already have a momentum moving the trigger back towards the firing point to much more rapidly fire his marker. I would think that this is much better than having the trigger just hit a pieve of metal and stick there, requiring the firee to start the pull with no momentum. How would the tournaments feel about this? In my opinion it would be fine since the trigger could never without the assistance of the firee get past the starting point. However, I dont know any of the rules and regs so I really wouldnt be able to say.

The RT trigger already provides return assist and the emag trigger already has a adjustable force in the magnets in the rail. You can add them or subtract them as you wish to lighten the amount of force you want to supply. So I realy do not know why you suggest both things that already are here. You must not be totaly familar with that?

Tom, I would really appreciate a response from you. I really admire your dedication to the sport, the company, and the fans. I feel like I have some valid suggestions and deserve a valid response. Oh, and I live in Illinois too, in a 'burb about 20 miles north of chicago. Where are the AGD offices? Dont worry, i wont come and bother you at work.

I also have to say one more thing, and be aware I AM NOT SAYING ANY OF THIS TO "BURN" AGD, IM SAYING THIS SO THAT IF SOMEONE AT AGD IS READING THEY KNOW WHY AT LEAST ONE PERSON ISNT BUYING THEIR PRODUCT. I HOPE THEY TAKE IT THE RIGHT WAY, AS ADVICE FROM AN ADMIRING FAN: As a prospective buyer of a high level gun, i have to say that I cannot consider an AGD product. I wont buy an E-MAG for four reasons: A)its heavy. B) The battery thing. C) its ugly, just a plain unattractive marker, and D) with the semi-availability of the X-MAG, I cant buy the E-MAG because i would be putting myself out of top tier of technology in months, and for $900+ its not worth it. Even if the X-MAG was available for, say, $1000 in America (i wont buy from Europe because of the tech support issues of having to send a package to Europe whenever something happensd that i dont know how to fix) , i wouldnt buy it because even though it fixed the heaviness issue and it fixed the ugliness issue (the X-MAG is actaully the most attractive marker in my opinion, simple and elegant, small and compact), there is still the battery issue and the fact that other markers have better trigger pulls. I really like the level 10 and the 26 bps without shootdown, but other good companies seem to achieve high rates without breaks using ACEs and they also seem to be able to shoot fast without shootdown. Get producing a mag that exceeds every other gun out there in every aspect of what players want from there guns and youll see who still plays with cockers, angels, and timmys.

Let me just tell you this fact. If you buy an AGD marker you will be buying the most well designed, from an engineering point, marker that is available. There is no comparison to what has gone into this design that achieves so much of the things nessicary to eliminate all the little things you seek and already has done so. Your points are addressed already and yet you still end up in the same place you started. That is hard for me to understand. And one point you need to understand is that ACE is not nessicary to eliminate ball breakage. Otherwise how could you explain the success of level 10 working without ACE? You can't! It's all about bolt speed. And the only other way to reduce bolt speed is to slow down ROF at the same time in all these other markers. In the Mags you get both. The only marker that can make that claim. Your last conclusion that these other companies have achieved high rates of fire without shoot down or are incorrect. I say prove it! This is not the case at all. Something has to give in one direction or the other in their design. They have not done it. You have been taken in by the myth's.

Let me tell you this not as a blind follower or groupie. People who know me will tell you that I never blindly follow. I have to be convinced and am always the skeptic. but I will tell you that you can rest assured if you purchase an AGD product you will have purchased the best engineered design that is out there. Or that may EVER be out there. It's design is so advantageous over the others they will never be able to compensate for all their flaws without totaly copying this Valve. It's that simple. I have seen it with my own eyes....

Re: Most important qaulities that need improvements in markers- consistancy and triggers

Originally posted by tuna We want markers to be able to shoot fast without chopping so we get ACEs and, in the case of mags, level 10.

XMag has an ACE... and Level 10 - Dual, redundant anti-chop systems, and an anti-breaking system... covering both electronic and mechanical methods of being nice to a paintball.

There is also a lot of work that has gone into markers that allow them to shoot at certain bps speeds with minimal or nonexistant dropoff. Mag valves can shoot up to 26 bps without dropoff if what i have read online is correct.

Mags do this via a clever dump chamber design that attributes to their nearly instantaneous recharge times. Some $1000+ guns take about 10 seconds to do what an AGD valve can do instantly. For other guns to match this, they would need to have bodies milled to accept AGD valves, or produce pneumatics that were close copies of AGD valves... which would perhaps have legal ramifications.

I consider accuracy and consistency in paintball as 2 different things- accuracy is determined by having a good barrel, good paint, and a good paint/barrel match.

I consider them to be one in the same. Paint/barrel match allows for tighter velocity control... ie: increased consistency.

How much more "accurate" would markers be if they fired with a consistency of +/- .5 to 1 fps? Is this even possible with the paint we use today, or is the paint itself too inconsitent in size, shape, and mass?

If you have 0 fps deviation, your paint will still be inaccurate and exhibit random flight paths. Slight improvements on velocity control will do nothing to overcome the inherent inaccuracy of a blunt object (paintball), which has poor aerodynamic properties to begin with.

For mags, I think that the first step is stopping the trend of having the monstrous ginormous battery in front of the trigger where the there should be an adapter for a vertical regualtor.

The Emag has a convenient horizontal regulator in the place of double stacked tubes. You need a foregrip, using the battery housing as a foregrip double is a utilitarian idea. Being able to easily remove the battery from the gun, rather than having it integrated is a nice feature. You can always remove the battery, put in your own foregrip... and run the battery remotely. But, it looks better with the battery on it.

BTW: This is what the horizontal regulator (which eliminates need for vertical regulator) looks like:

Anyway, being able to have a secondary reg will help to increase the consistancy of the air moving in to the marker, but I think that internals can be designed that will be able to really make a consistant marker.

They've already got this covered. Adding another regulator to an EMag with a reg'd HPA would be triple regulation... this is bad. You are proposing a fix to a non-existant problem.

2: Today there are many markers that say that they will shoot 20 bps. One coming out soon says that it will do 30. There are even elctro boards for markers that allow the markers to do 66.6 bps, whether the internals will be able to keep up or not is another story. My point is, can anyon really pull the trigger 30 times in one second? Is there anyone that can outshoot a HALO B on a current trigger found on any marker?

No, but the ability to shoot that fast w/o shootdown is an attestment of the marker's excellent engineering and overdesign. If it works great at 30bps... human achievable ROF is effortless and is done well. Roughly 20 bps is actually human achievable, BTW. Roller triggers makes this possible for mere mortals.

I think that a very advanced trigger has to be made in order to keep up with these very high rates of fire...

I think that next generation needs to combine a super short 1 to 1.5mm trigger pull with the blast of the reactive valve.

Here's how I envision it: first you need an amazingly light trigger (i mean the actual part that you pull, the stem-like object that you move with your finger(s)-just so there is no confuson). I'm talking space-age light, would practically float in the air light.

BTW... the return mechanism you describe would result in trigger bounce... which is not legal within NPPL rules. Regardless... EMag hybrid mode does what you describe w/o magnets. It can be adjusted by adjusting HPA input pressure.

Hello.....

Here is a new idea:

Instead of trying to get the highest bps....and improving our triggers so we "can" shoot that fast, we should just come to the conclusion that no person can shoot more than about 16-20 bps.....NO MATTER HOW YOU MEASURE IT!!!!

Re: Re: Most important qaulities that need improvements in markers- consistancy and triggers

We all know this... it is obvious. But there is something to be said about a marker with the mechanical ability to go well beyond this. There is also something to be said about manufacturers claiming this about their guns, when their first cycle is the only cycle wherein the pneumatics actually functioned correctly.

It is like... two companies claim that their cars can hit 9000 RPMs. However, one is well past the red line, and the other is breathing easy.

Side note: A marker that displays 66bps is like putting a racing sticker on your Saturn. It if makes you happy...

belive me, i do not want to bash agd at all.But isnt the rtpro/emag a little inconsistant at the chrono due to shoot up? I was just wondering. BTW, from an engineering standpoint, AGD has the others beat by miles. I love mags, just had that little question

Alright, first off, it is late, and I am extremely well caffinated. Second, I read no further than the original post due to the large amount of words located there.

That said, I am currently playing with the scroll wheel on my mouse, and just came up with an idea.

Would it be possible to abandon the trigger idea entirely and instead use a mouse wheel-like device? This would be similar to the roller trigger developed by AGD a while ago, but would be a complete redesign of the way the gun was fired. Most likely this would only work on electronic guns, but couldnt the mag valve at least keep up with the amazing amount of fire this would put out?

And i realize that this would probably not work with existing tourney rules, but think of the amount of paint you would be able to put out before the loader was outfed and the gun chopped dozens of balls.

THat said, whats the point? I believe that markers today put out way more paint than is necessary. This would only compound te problem.

Originally posted by Redkey I've seen the ones for a single shot. Haven't seen or heard anything about graphs for a string of shots.

Using even the data from the single shots, you can make an educated guess based on the charge rates and time lines.

A simple conclusion is that a gun that can't fully recharge in a timely manor for one shot will not fully recharge between shots for a burst of shots either.

If a gun firing a single shot fully recharges within a given time frame then we can conclude to a certain point that that we can successfully fire the gun at the rate of (1 sec)/(valve recharge time) without shootdown.

There are other factors that will alter some of the results a bit. A note would be any gun with a volumizer since the volumizers act as a buffer to help supply air to the chamber. Once the volumizer has exhausted its buffer of recharge air, then the guns recharge ability also drops off.

There is nothing like real supporting data though. That I do agree with and it is the real deal.

Lethargic;

The scroll wheel idea has been discussed before. Unless you only have one activation per rotation, it would be considered illegal. One activation per rotation would probably make it slower than most triggers on the guns right now.

Except for the Automag in front, its usually the man behind the equipment that counts.

The scroll wheel idea has been discussed before. Unless you only have one activation per rotation, it would be considered illegal. One activation per rotation would probably make it slower than most triggers on the guns right now.

He noted that it would probably be illegal in tourneys (which is is), but I think he was just aiming for the idea of how fast a mag would be able to shoot consistantly at that speed. If you could reliably mount it, you could probably make the marker shoot ungodly fast with a mouse wheel.